[Advaita-l] Advaiti Response to this report?

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:12 PM, V Subrahmanian
<v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Namaste Sri Praveen
>>
>> Tell me one place where there is no Brahman. This is how
>> Hiranyakashipu asked the boy Prahlada. He said Everywhere. Even the non
>> living Pillar. He broke it to see and inside there was Narasimha.
>>
>
> The Pillar had to be broken.  There lies the answer to your question.  It
> is only because Sat cannot be seen there was the need to break the pillar.
> This episode only symbolically teaches that the gross, the nAma-rUpa pair,
> is what is 'covering', enveloping the extremely subtle Sat that indeed is
> everywhere, everything. Prahlada had to show that the Sat is the
> adhishThAnam of the superimposed pillar.  In fact Sat alone IS.  It is only
The Pillar had to be broken. But who broke it? A Demon broke it. But
Prahlada did not have to break it. He was seeing Narayana only
everywhere. Like this a man with right knowledge will see Sat
everywhere. You cannot teach Maya priniciple to him. It is unnecessary
confusing and complicated to talk Maya.

> because the unenlightened is engrossed in the gross thinking that that
> alone is the real, the truth, the Scripture has to show by means of
> negation, neti neti, the only reality, Sat, by 'breaking' the 'pillar'.
This may be done to start studies. But the advanced student will not
need Neti Neti if he has realized Sat is everywhere.

> So, by the indispensable method of negation, neti neti, the Scripture is
> compelled to use mAyAvAda only to enable the grasping of the truth that it
> itself teaches through brahmavAda.  Thus it is impossible to implement
> brahmavAda in the absence of the tool mAyAvAda.  Just one example where
> this, this alone is, the method of the Scripture is:
>
Brahmavada is the highest teaching. They may use Mayavada for starting
students. Because they are not interested in seeing the same Sat
everywhere.  For them Sruti is saying Neti Neti.  If he is convinced
there is only Sat why confuse him with Maya?

> *नासतो*  विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सतः ।
> उभयोरपि दृष्टोऽन्तस्त्वनयोस्तत्त्वदर्शिभिः ।।१६।। BG 2.16
>
> Here note the key words : asat and sat.  After defining what these two are:
> asat has no true existence whatsoever and sat has no destruction
> whatsoever, the verse goes on to say the most crucial thing:  The firm
> understanding of these TWO (mAyAvAda and brahmavAda) is essential for one
> to be a tattvavit.  It neither stops with either of these two nor endorses
> that Tattvavedanam consists of just a knowledge of either of these two;
> both are a must.
>
But you can see in any Advaita text more than 80% is Mayavada. Why?
This is not correct.

> There are a number of such dual-teachings all over the scripture.  (The
> teaching of) brahmavAda is impossible without (the teaching of) mAyAvAda
> and mAyAvAda is incomplete without culminating in BrahmavAa.
>
> Sri Vidyaranya Swamin says in the Panchadashi:
>
> चिद्यं वा परिहारो वा क्रियतां द्वतभाषया
>
> The vyvahara of question-answer (teaching) is possible only through the
> language of duality; hence the need for the pair of mAyAvAda and
> BrahmavAda.
>
> This is the Vedanta siddhAnta.  Anything that differs from this fundamental
> position of vedanta is simply inadmissible in the sampradaya.
>
> Om Tat Sat  (signifying my last post in this thread)
>
> subrahmanian.v
>
>
>
>
>> This shows Brahman is there in everything. That is Sat is there in
>> everything.
>>
>>

-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh